Kitsap County Collective Bargaining Agreements

2 The sheriff, the county and the guild are parties to a collective agreement (CBA) that covers sheriff`s deputy sheriffs.  22 However, as with any contract, a court cannot impose a collective agreement contrary to public policy.   See W.R. Grace – Co. v. Local Union 759, 461 U.S. 757, 766, 103 P.C. 2177, 76 L.Ed.2d 298 (1983);  E. Associated Coal Corp.

v. United Mine Workers of Am., 531 U.S. 57, 62, 121 S.C. 462, 148 L.Ed.2d 354 (2000).   If the contract, as interpreted by an arbitrator, violates an explicit, clearly defined and predominant public order, we are not required to enforce it.  W.R. Grace and Co., 461 U.S. to 766, 103 P.C. 2177 (citing Hurd v. Hodge, 334 U.S. 24, 35, 68 P.C. 847, 92 L.Ed.

1187 (1948) and Muschany v. United States, 324 U.S. 49, 66, 65 S.Ct. 442, 89 L.Ed. 744 (1945)). 1 The Kitsap County Sheriff`s Office terminated Deputy Brian LaFrance because of lying and unpredictable behavior.   LaFrance and the Deputy Sheriff of Kitsap County (the guild) filed a complaint against his resignation.   The parties entered into arbitration proceedings in accordance with their collective agreement.   The arbitrator agreed that LaFrance had been false on several occasions, but decided that Kitsap County (the county) could not establish by clear and convincing evidence that resignation was the right form of discipline.

  She ordered the withdrawal of LaFrance`s dismissal and stated that LaFrance could return to full service if he were to undergo physical and psychological examinations.   In the end, LaFrance did not feel that the county was acting to implement the sentence, and he filed a complaint with the Supreme Court.   Prior to the trial, the county delivered a summary verdict;  he also filed an application for a letter from certiorari requesting verification and leave of the arbitration award.   As the court found that there was no real material question of fact regarding the execution of the sentence, the court granted the county`s request for a summary decision, but denied its request for certiorari`s letter. LaFrance and the Guild appealed the award of summary judgment to the county and asked the county to render a summary judgment instead.   Cross-Appeals County, arguing that the arbitration award was unenforceable, and as such, the court was wrong to refuse its petition for the writing of certiorari.   We agree that the arbitral award was unenforceable, contrary to public policy;  So we brush off the court`s refusal to write and evacuate the sentence. On the other hand, LaFrance`s reinstatement is contrary to several public guidelines regarding a police officer`s duties to the public.   For example, RCW 36.28.010 Sheriff`s Deputies call for arresting all those who break the peace, defending the county against those who threaten public peace, executing orders to magistrates and executing all warrants of other officials.